Guild Wars 2 Anniversary plans – Get ready to celebrate from 20 August

It’s almost a year since Guild Wars 2 launched into the world of MMOs and Colin Johanson has been busy teasing about what they have planned to celebrate. Speaking to IGN, Johanson says:

“We’re going to do a release on the 20th that is intended to be our big anniversary release celebration. That release is intended not only to provide a lot of awesome content for people to experience, but to also set the tone for what they should expect for the living world and the types of things we want to do with events in the year to come.

“It takes the story of the last year and brings it all together. It makes it clear where everything has been going and really closes a lot of open questions that players have had. It’s a story that really affects the entire world and permanently creates content and change for the entire world game-wide, which is really something that’s important to us and we want to showcase that that’s where stuff is headed.

I think we have some really ambitious plans for next year for what we want to do with the event system, and this kind of showcases a little step of where that can go.”

To celebrate the fact that your characters are one year old, gifts will also be handed out to players but Johanson has not said what that gift will be.

63 Opinions have been expressed on “Guild Wars 2 Anniversary plans – Get ready to celebrate from 20 August”

For me its a celebration of “Light & Shadow”. There are many things in GW2 I like (that’s why I am still loyal to the game), things that have improved over the past year, but also things where I see GW2 and its developers heading in a wrong and unpleasant direction:

GW2 has captured a big audience of players, veterans and new ones so the world feels alive with them most of the time (cities, events etc.), but the divide by servers (especially the EU and NA servers that are unable to guest each other) has broken apart almost every guild and alliance that has been built up during seven years of the original GW). Not being true to us from the beginning, so we at least knew from the start that EU & NA players would never ever play together is something I can’t forgive ArenaNet. The original game was a truly international game, now we have a strongly regional game.

The early personal story parts of the game are undoubtedly the best quests & adventures that haven been told, with interesting and lovable characters: You took a charr armored vehicle out on a drunken joyride and became friends with a Iron Legion Warband. You discovered that true valor came from the heart when assisting Malyck in Caledon Forest and you did a covert-alliteration-drinking-rescue with Tybalt.
Sadly the story proves to be not that strong later on (to put it politely). The personal story instance is a lame and empty place to go and feels everything but personal. I want to Zephyrite Sanctum model standing on a table there. I want to have Majory’s Journal lying on a book cart. I want to have a place of power in my instance, so I can infuse Quartz, perhaps in the form of an Orrian relic.

While I love some of the Living Story elements that we had over the past year, I feel driven by the huge amount of temporary content that showers us every two weeks now. Diversity is great, most of it going away is not. A first step to counter that has been the daily rotation of mini games. But what about the return of SAB in Rata Sum, to name just one temporary piece that some people liked?
Do not get me started on “swing a sword again and again” comparisons. In the Manifesto video Colin Johanson promised me, I should not be forced to do that over and over again, but it is exactly what most of the living story achivements want me to do: Kill 100 foes in the Crown Pavillion for the Rata Sum emissary, for the LA emissary, for the Grove emissary …

Balance has always been a problem in the original Guild Wars due to dual professions and a huge amount of combos you could make with the variety of skills. Narrowing it down in GW2 to a weapon skill bar + and utility bar in GW2 was a great idea – and I love that game mechanic very much. Sadly the developers gave up the concept of every profession having the same pool of health, which I see as the cornerstone of many balance problems we have now. It is obvious to me that you can not balance a game around sPvP 5 vs.5 and expect it will have very different impact on PvE (where it has to scale with strong Veteran & Champion monsters) and WvW where Thieves can practically do whatever they want to as there is no way to knock them out of stealth.
IMO developers at ArenaNet are doing a sub par job at trying to keep up a profession balance and I do not see that chance in the future.

With the latest patch ArenaNet made playing alternate characters easier, by introducing the “wallet”, but WvW players still have to decide how to spend their ability points on every single character.

I really hope ArenaNet steers Guild Wars 2 towards a direction I like so that it can capture my attention as long as the original game did.

Sadly the developers gave up the concept of every profession having the same pool of health, which I see as the cornerstone of many balance problems we have now. It is obvious to me that you can not balance a game around sPvP 5 vs.5 and expect it will have very different impact on PvE (where it has to scale with strong Veteran & Champion monsters) and WvW where Thieves can practically do whatever they want to as there is no way to knock them out of stealth.
IMO developers at ArenaNet are doing a sub par job at trying to keep up a profession balance and I do not see that chance in the future.

I’m not following what you’re saying. It seems like you’re saying PvP balance is pretty good, which I agree with. Thieves are very good 1v1 in WvW, but are the worst profession in zerg fights. It’s a matter of where you are. If you’re an axe necro, don’t go running off to solo cap in enemy territory. If you’re a good ele, mesmer or ranger, by all means run, around by yourself because you have ways to deal with thieves. What is the balance problem in your opinion?

QUOTE=Fluffball;5848822]What is the balance problem in your opinion?[/QUOTE]

In general: Dividing profession not only by armour class but also by basic health created a problem with balancing damage & defensive skills right from the beginning. The difference e.g. between an Ele and a Necromancer in terms of health is huge. I have no idea why they had to create a gap that is about 75% of the Elementalists basic health. Remember, in GW1 we all had 480 hit The problem is that balance is not possible for all aspects of the game. The balance works well for PvP (as you said too), where the map is relatively small and split teams of 5 are the main focus. In GW1 we had a PvP and PvE split of skills after a while, in GW2 we only have very few differnces (e.g. the damage of Confusion). The large scale of WvW is added to the pool of factors that have to be balanced (which GW1 had not – ABs do not count IMO).

What is the balance problem in your opinion?

In general: Dividing profession not only by armour class but also by basic health created a problem with balancing damage & defensive skills right from the beginning. The difference e.g. between an Ele and a Necromancer in terms of health is huge. I have no idea why they had to create a gap that is about 75% of the Elementalists basic health. Remember, in GW1 we all had 480 hit points, no matter the profession.

Concerning Thieves:

For Zerg fights, use the Short bow. You can do fine wit that (evasive shot #3; bouncing projectiles #1, blast finisher at #2; poison field #4)

The main problem with Thieves in WvW is the combination of several things:
1. high mobility and gap closers (just take steal as a basic game mechanic)
2. the ability to chain stealth skills to a state where you can stay invisible almost all the time
3. using 1. and 2. to chose to get into the fight or out of a fight at your own will, allowing you to reset and heal up
4. number 3 combined with the targeting system of GW2

It would be worth a try to let Thieves be knocked out of Stealth if they are Stunned or Immobilized in WvW.

The differing health pools is actually a really good way to balance things, IMO. It’s so simple. It’s balancing skills and traits that is very complicated, but health is just a number to sort of close the balance gap. Its uses are pretty apparent; can you imagine fighting a high-mobility, covered-in-boons ele with 40k health like a necro? That would be so obscenely over powered. Necros have horrible mobility and not that many defensive skills so they take a good punch.

And speaking of mobility, that’s why not many people roam in WvW with a necro. Eles and thieves are popular because of their mobility. And their low health pools make catching them easier for the other roamers like mesmers or rangers. CC the thief, which mesmers and rangers are excellent at, and you took away their main (only?) line of defense.

QUOTE=Gorani;5848794]”[/QUOTE]:cutie:In my opinion, when ANet decided to not have a dual-profession system, they realized that the resulting combat would be flat and uninteresting unless they made sure to differentiate professions a lot. Unfortunately they also decided to have only one general manageable combat resource: cooldown. This means that mechanics similar to Soul Reaping, exhaustion and so on that existed in GW1 are not possible in GW2. Another problem is that even though the traits system of GW2 has more possibilities than the simple attribute system of GW1, said attribute system worked together with the dual-profession one, and more importantly, with the greater number of skills. Also, attributes were free to reallocate in GW1 (after the removal of refund points), while GW2 traits are not free to reallocate. This obviously reduces customizability which, again, makes combat more uninteresting.

This led to a situation where ANet was forced to differentiate between professions by using the few parameters that they could affect, such as health and exact mechanisms of skills (e.g. mobility, combo potential and so on). Unfortunately their aim was set on having as many as 10 different professions even before the mechanics of the game were invented (IIRC the number of professions was set even before anyone including ANet knew that there would not be a general energy system, in other words, they had a backwards design process). This means that now we have a GW2 which is rather unbalanced and probably harder to balance (and much harder to make controlled additions to) than GW1 was.

Now you’re just making things up, Jam. GW1 was a balancing nightmare. GW2 is pretty close to being balanced across the board. I’m sure you can pick on some things, but even at the very highest level of PvP, all professions see use. Yes, top teams even use warriors, which plebeians will scream are “garbage class” in PvP.

imo because the traits are so specific it makes builds less customizable regardless of the cost behind respecing, they should’ve made the traits like att points so it gives a bonus for a whole set of skills instead of just 2 or 3.
you need around 3-4 traits just to get one build done correctly, in GW1 you could just simply max your fire for instance and all the fire magic skills are powerful, not just the handful of skills.

that’s what they did wrong, they didn’t make the traits global which reduces the freedom of build making.
not only that, because traits are so tightly bound to a handful of skills, changing around your build is a costly chore.

you can say all you want about att points but at least it made the builds simple to make and simple to change, traits are just way to restricted for that.

And profession-specifics
-clones and shatters
-life force and death shroud
-initiative and stealth
-etc etc

mechanics similar to Soul Reaping, exhaustion and so on that existed in GW1 are not possible in GW2.

Aside for all the cases where they are. See above.

even though the traits system of GW2 has more possibilities than the simple attribute system of GW1, said attribute system worked together with the dual-profession one, and more importantly, with the greater number of skills

I miss the sheer number of skills and how traits mixed with it, but it was horribly broken balance-wise. I remember hearing people tell me that scythe was best used by almost anything but a dervish. Broken much?

Now you're just making things up, Jam. GW1 was a balancing nightmare. GW2 is pretty close to being balanced across the board. I'm sure you can pick on some things, but even at the very highest level of PvP, all professions see use. Yes, top teams even use warriors, which plebeians will scream are "garbage class" in PvP.

In RPS, all three options see use, yet it's the by definition least balanced game possible. I do agree though that GW1 was a balancing nightmare, but that was because of two reasons. First, they added professions and skills, and did so in a very haphazard way. After NF, GW1 basically had 90 classes. Quite a big mistake IMO, because basic GW1 had 30 classes and seemed not that hard to balance. Second, they absolutely refused to make certain changes that would make balancing much easier (for example changing Expertise).

Yes, if you ignore:
-Boons and buffs
-Endurance
And profession-specifics
-clones and shatters
-life force and death shroud
-initiative and stealth
-etc etc
Aside for all the cases where they are. See above.
I miss the sheer number of skills and how traits mixed with it, but it was horribly broken balance-wise. I remember hearing people tell me that scythe was best used by almost anything but a dervish. Broken much?
Yes, this is your single valid point.

Endurance is a general resource, but with a very specific use. A boon is not a resource at all but an effect. And so on. You misunderstand, as usual. Clones, for example, is an effect that, if you go really far fetched about it, does create resources (the actual clones), but only for a single profession, hardly general. See the thing is that exhaustion, for example, would affect every character that used a skill that caused it. I could get on a W/E and get exhaustion. Similarly, if you wanted to use mesmer skills, you could choose to do so with faster cast times (Me/X), larger energy pool (E/Me), soul reaping (N/Me), and so on. While this caused the game to be harder to balance (though not really in the basic format), it also afforded a flexibility and possibility to customize that would keep the combat feel alive.
GW2 doesn't have all that, so ANet had to find other paths. Huge health differences is one way. Having a basic set of stats that affect other things (e.g. power, precision and so on) is another. This is not a criticism against GW2. It is just a comment on their probable design discussions.
A question, though. Do you mean that the dervish was broken, or that the scythe was?

blablabla they are all examples of “combat resource” no matter how limited or general, and no matter how you call them. You can earn it and spend it during combat for combat, it’s a combat resource.

GW1 had similar things, except that many resources were generalized across professions for the dual-profession mechanic to become interesting (and broken). To the extent that expertise and soul reaping made N/R different from R/N, it also made the dual-prof mechanic broken.

Huge health difference is not in itself a problem. Mesmer and thief have very low health, and yet they have no problem surviving because of clones, mobility, and stealth.

A question, though. Do you mean that the dervish was broken, or that the scythe was?

That’s not a fair question, because it really depends on how you fix it.

The problem was that scythe was stronger than other melee weapons, and dervish was weaker than other melee professions. You needed to transfer some of that scythe strength to the dervish.

For example, if the scythe was made to hit 2 foes max instead of 3, and dervish would hit an additional foe per attack with melee weapons, that would weaken the scythe on non-dervishes, strengthen melee damage with dervish on non-scythe, and otherwise keep scythe dervish as strong as always.

Would it fix the problem? Not sure, but it probably would reduce the problem. One thing I’d worry in that scenario is that it might make non-scythe dervs too strong…

blablabla they are all examples of "combat resource" no matter how limited or general, and no matter how you call them. You can earn it and spend it during combat for combat, it's a combat resource.
GW1 had similar things, except that many resources were generalized across professions for the dual-profession mechanic to become interesting (and broken). To the extent that expertise and soul reaping made N/R different from R/N, it also made the dual-prof mechanic broken.
Huge health difference is not in itself a problem. Mesmer and thief have very low health, and yet they have no problem surviving because of clones, mobility, and stealth.
That's not a fair question, because it really depends on how you fix it.
The problem was that scythe was stronger than other melee weapons, and dervish was weaker than other melee professions. You needed to transfer some of that scythe strength to the dervish.
For example, if the scythe was made to hit 2 foes max instead of 3, and dervish would hit an additional foe per attack with melee weapons, that would weaken the scythe on non-dervishes, strengthen melee damage with dervish on non-scythe, and otherwise keep scythe dervish as strong as always.
Would it fix the problem? Not sure, but it probably would reduce the problem. One thing I'd worry in that scenario is that it might make non-scythe dervs too strong...

You misunderstand. It is ok. Not your fault. Do you actually mean that ANet aimed to make a broken game?

I find your comment about health differences not being a problem confusing. Why would it not be a problem (to balancing)? What does the survival of mesmers and thieves have to do with it? Random chance is not balance.

And what do you mean by “it depends on how you fix it”? Do you mean that both were broken? Because if so, I agree. I think both NF professions were quite broken.

If you claim I am wrong, then show me how. Otherwise, you bring nothing to the conversation.

Health difference is not necessarily a problem if it is compensated somehow. Survival value is a mix of health, armor, health regen, prots, dodge, mobility, stealth, ability to make distractions, etc. To talk about health in isolation is quite meaningless.

As for “it depends on how you fix it”, I mean that the value of scythes and dervishes are equally multi-faceted as health, so it’s equally meaningless to try to discuss the balance of a single element without considering the system it is built into. The system is broken, but mainly because some parts combine much better than they should have.

If you claim I am wrong, then show me how. Otherwise, you bring nothing to the conversation.
Health difference is not necessarily a problem if it is compensated somehow.

Survival value is a mix of health, armor, health regen, prots, dodge, mobility, stealth, ability to make distractions, etc. To talk about health in isolation is quite meaningless.

As for “it depends on how you fix it”, I mean that the value of scythes and dervishes are equally multi-faceted as health, so it’s equally meaningless to try to discuss the balance of a single element without considering the system it is built into. The system is broken, but mainly because some parts combine much better than they should have.What? I claim that you misunderstand me. For example, you again talk about how health difference is not a problem for the individual player. Which is true. It’s also true that boats float on water, but you don’t see me dropping that in a discussion that has nothing to do with boats.

Anyway so you don’t even know what you yourself think about scythes and dervishes? Typical Alaris, ****ing troll why do I respond to you. Go eat a bowl of dog **** or something.

If you’re not going to say anything with substance, how am I supposed to reply?

Balance, by definition, is “equal distribution of weight”. If you give a profession stealth, you boost its ability to survive. You can compensate by reducing its health until it is “balanced”.

To discuss health outside of survival value, or scythe or dervish outside of dual-profession interactions, is pretty meaningless. It makes no sense that you’d want to take the conversation there, because if we did, we’d be reduced to grunting.

If you're not going to say anything with substance, how am I supposed to reply?
Balance, by definition, is "equal distribution of weight". If you give a profession stealth, you boost its ability to survive. You can compensate by reducing its health until it is "balanced".
To discuss health outside of survival value, or scythe or dervish outside of dual-profession interactions, is pretty meaningless. It makes no sense that you'd want to take the conversation there, because if we did, we'd be reduced to grunting.

lel

But what are you replying to? You are saying that there can be a balance despite differing health pools, which is true. Maybe you should try actually reading my posts. There’s plenty of substance there.

Your method of balancing reduces to depending on random chance since the evasion mechanism/s treats different damage application methods differently. With 10 professions, each with specific mechanics, that’s a lot to juggle.

About the dervish thing, I just want to find out what it is you think is broken about the situation. Do you also think that it was broken that necros were good healers or that rangers were good with hammers?

Saying it’s a lot to juggle doesn’t mean it can’t be done. It can be done, and I think compartmentalization (as is done in GW2) is a huge step towards achieving better balance.

As for GW1, what is broken isn’t that rangers can use hammers or scythes, or necros can heal… but that the combination of their own skills and primary abilities with a secondary profession lead to combinations that vastly outperform the intended abilities (e.g. that of a primary profession).

For example, scythe hits 3 foes, which is fine when used with dervish skills intended for that. But it becomes too good when combined with non-dervish skills that are balanced on a per-hit basis, and/or life/energy stealing mods. My proposed solution above would have helped reduce that problem.

The healing necro isn’t bad in principle. The problem was that a big component of healing is managing your energy, and necro healers can basically have unlimited energy which is too powerful for the role. If necros would have to manage energy like anyone else (or have to manage something else) then it would not be a problem…

Saying it's a lot to juggle doesn't mean it can't be done. It can be done, and I think compartmentalization (as is done in GW2) is a huge step towards achieving better balance.
As for GW1, what is broken isn't that rangers can use hammers or scythes, or necros can heal... but that the combination of their own skills and primary abilities with a secondary profession lead to combinations that vastly outperform the intended abilities (e.g. that of a primary profession).
For example, scythe hits 3 foes, which is fine when used with dervish skills intended for that. But it becomes too good when combined with non-dervish skills that are balanced on a per-hit basis, and/or life/energy stealing mods. My proposed solution above would have helped reduce that problem.
The healing necro isn't bad in principle. The problem was that a big component of healing is managing your energy, and necro healers can basically have unlimited energy which is too powerful for the role. If necros would have to manage energy like anyone else (or have to manage something else) then it would not be a problem...

No, the problem is compartmentalization. With GW2, ANet has to balance things that will interact with each other without having a unified metric of comparison. Of course it can be done, but it’s more difficult, and since even the GW1 system was more than ANet could handle… Well.

I will tell you what I mean. Take the two GW1 skills Shock and Shove. They have the same basic effects knockdown, and same energy cost. Shock deals (non-negligible) damage if you have high air magic, but if you do, you are probably AL60 and don’t want to get close to people anyway, so that can be basically ignored. Shove deals (non-negligible) damage if you are warrior, but only on moving targets. On the other hand, if targets get a warrior next to them, they tend to move, so that sub-clause can (often) be ignored. Additionally, Shock causes exhaustion, which causes the only profession likely to efficiently use it (warriors) to be careful about its use (which is good). On the other hand, Shove is susceptible to anti-knockdown stances. Shove is better than Shock, so even that out by making people sacrifice the elite slot for it.

The same discussion can’t be done about GW2 because damage dealt is also damage received, but on health pools of different size. Of course it would also not even arise because the two skills belong to different professions. However, both would still exist in the game, and need to be balanced against each other. And there is no way to do so because you can’t see them in isolation: there’s too many variables affecting them. Instead, you’d have to just balance warriors against elementalists.

Anyway, what do you mean by “intended abilities”? Why would an ability be intended for its primary profession? It’s not! Read the Prophecies manuscripts, or even the official, ANet-sponsored Prophecies strategy guide, where it is suggested that a R/Me should take Backfire or Shatter Enchantment, or that a Mo/W can be a “holy warrior” by putting 10 in swordsmanship, or that a Me/Mo is a “great profession if you want to be a healer”. Those were intended abilities in GW1. The game should have been more broken according to you, then. Fortunately ANet messed up and the result was a good game.

If I had to balance a game like GW2, I would balance it based on given factors: (1) survivability, (2) damage, and (3) utility. You can’t make a profession that has low life, low armor, but very high KD because then the utility of KD would be over-powered. Even if you tweak that profession so it wins just as often as a warrior or elementalist, it would be broken in tons of situations. It would be too good in parties against foes that can be KD’ed, and bad against foes that can’t be KD’ed.

Having too many variables is important in keeping the game complex enough so people can’t break the code. It also makes it interesting. But even if a game is complex, good measure and analysis can provide pretty solid ways to balance it.

If I had to balance a game like GW2, I would balance it based on given factors: (1) survivability, (2) damage, and (3) utility. You can't make a profession that has low life, low armor, but very high KD because then the utility of KD would be over-powered. Even if you tweak that profession so it wins just as often as a warrior or elementalist, it would be broken in tons of situations. It would be too good in parties against foes that can be KD'ed, and bad against foes that can't be KD'ed.
Having too many variables is important in keeping the game complex enough so people can't break the code. It also makes it interesting. But even if a game is complex, good measure and analysis can provide pretty solid ways to balance it.
By "intended" I meant that abilities were meant to be usable by other professions, but primary roles should only be as good or lower on a secondary compared to on a primary. Necro healers are good, unless they are so good that non-necro healers are no longer desirable.

In analysis it’s important to be able to isolate aspects of the system, like I did above with two of GW1’s touch knockdown skills. In GW2, the smallest pieces you can isolate are entire classes. As you yourself point out, various subject abilities affect different objects (enemies) in different ways, depending on their abilities. As the number of abilities increase, the number of vectors also increase, superexponentially. Try it on paper and you’ll see.

So basically what you think was broken about the scythe was that it was handled better by everyone but a dervish? That’s it? No more fine-grained opinion about it?

In analysis it's important to be able to isolate aspects of the system. (...) Try it on paper and you'll see.

Why use paper, I do this for a living, reverse-engineering the brain.

I’m not saying it’s easy, but it is feasible with the right tools. And I am sure if I can do it in my work on the brain, they can do it with a system they designed from the ground up.

Being able to reduce to components (which they can reduce more than single professions) certainly helps, but in a high-synergy system like GW2, it’s not sufficient.

So basically what you think was broken about the scythe was that it was handled better by everyone but a dervish? That's it? No more fine-grained opinion about it?

I can go more fine-grain, by saying that part of the issue is that it has a default ability (and many skills) to hit multiple foes via a physical attack, whereas most GW1 professions are balanced around usually hitting one foe at a time or hitting multiple foes via magic. Hitting many foes via physical attacks is a problem to balance, but only because of skills and functions that assume you hit one foe at a time.

Dervish is balanced for hitting multiple foes at a time with physical attacks. However, other professions are not balanced for it, so they can take advantage of broken synergies. Which is where the problem comes from.

As I suggested, if you move some of that “hit multiple foes” ability from the scythe to the dervish, that would go a long way towards balancing the game.

Why use paper, I do this for a living, reverse-engineering the brain.
I'm not saying it's easy, but it is feasible with the right tools. And I am sure if I can do it in my work on the brain, they can do it with a system they designed from the ground up.
Being able to reduce to components (which they can reduce more than single professions) certainly helps, but in a high-synergy system like GW2, it's not sufficient.
I can go more fine-grain, by saying that part of the issue is that it has a default ability (and many skills) to hit multiple foes via a physical attack, whereas most GW1 professions are balanced around usually hitting one foe at a time or hitting multiple foes via magic. Hitting many foes via physical attacks is a problem to balance, but only because of skills and functions that assume you hit one foe at a time.
Dervish is balanced for hitting multiple foes at a time with physical attacks. However, other professions are not balanced for it, so they can take advantage of broken synergies. Which is where the problem comes from.
As I suggested, if you move some of that "hit multiple foes" ability from the scythe to the dervish, that would go a long way towards balancing the game.

You can use excel or whatever instead of paper, but if you are interested in these kinds of thing, I really urge you to set up a small-scale system and then put up all the relations, then add one component and see what happens to the number of relations… Also change the way components interact (the difference between GW1 and GW2).

What work are you doing on the brain? While I’m sure it’s complex, I’m also fairly certain that the methods used are different(?)

Ok, so your problem is with the scythe, not the actual dervish. Yes, I agree. However I would argue that a better way would be to tie the number of triggers for on-hit effects to scythe mastery (similar to the energy gain from critical strikes). That way, only a dervish with 14/16 scythe would be able to actually trigger, for example, zealous 3 times, while a ranger with maybe 11 scythe would only trigger it once no matter how many enemies she hit. Or possibly making it a % chance of triggering, similar to how the double striking of dagger mastery works. Would that solve your problems?

The number of relations doesn’t really matter so long as you have a good way to pick out non-additive relations.

If the vast majority of relations are additive (or at least additive after the proper transformation) then you can easily balance for it. But additive relations are boring, so devs introduce a number of non-additive relations into the mix to keep it fun. It’s those relations that they need to keep a close eye on, especially on how those interact between themselves. But you’ll find that most things they put in are pretty additive most of the time, and non-additive things are generally kept in check and closely monitored.

Data gathering and statistics are common to sciences because it works, so it would be inefficient for them to use different methods for game balance.

As for your scythe solution, I can see that it would help. But it wouldn’t fix it.

To fix it, you need to (1) make the scythe equally good across professions, perhaps in different ways, (2) make the dervish equally good across valid weapon choices, whatever those are, and (3) make 1 & 2 hold true across a wide variety of builds.

Your solution wouldn’t really work in too many cases, e.g. it would punish too harshly dervishes who opt against maxing scythe and/or runes of scythe mastery, (2) it would leave the dervish too weak when using other weapons compared to other professions, by not providing any special bonus to those weapons (e.g. ranger still gets energy discount on using swords and scythes, but dervish gets no bonus on using bows or swords).

This is why I think the number of hits (or % of hits) has to at least in part be something that dervishes do. Dervishes need to have a boost to weapons (any weapon) that compares to ranger’s energy reduction or warrior’s damage+adrenaline or assassin’s energy gain on crits.

The number of relations doesn't really matter so long as you have a good way to pick out non-additive relations.
If the vast majority of relations are additive (or at least additive after the proper transformation) then you can easily balance for it. But additive relations are boring, so devs introduce a number of non-additive relations into the mix to keep it fun. It's those relations that they need to keep a close eye on, especially on how those interact between themselves. But you'll find that most things they put in are pretty additive most of the time, and non-additive things are generally kept in check and closely monitored.
Data gathering and statistics are common to sciences because it works, so it would be inefficient for them to use different methods for game balance.
As for your scythe solution, I can see that it would help. But it wouldn't fix it.
To fix it, you need to (1) make the scythe equally good across professions, perhaps in different ways, (2) make the dervish equally good across valid weapon choices, whatever those are, and (3) make 1 & 2 hold true across a wide variety of builds.
Your solution wouldn't really work in too many cases, e.g. it would punish too harshly dervishes who opt against maxing scythe and/or runes of scythe mastery, (2) it would leave the dervish too weak when using other weapons compared to other professions, by not providing any special bonus to those weapons (e.g. ranger still gets energy discount on using swords and scythes, but dervish gets no bonus on using bows or swords).
This is why I think the number of hits (or % of hits) has to at least in part be something that dervishes do. Dervishes need to have a boost to weapons (any weapon) that compares to ranger's energy reduction or warrior's damage+adrenaline or assassin's energy gain on crits.

But the vast number of relations are not additive, and are cascading. If you were to form a system of equations on this, the majority of equations would be nonlinear and would have irreducible references to each other. Of course, this is true for any remotely complex game, which is why those methods are not used.

I don’t see what you mean. Just now, you agreed that the scythe was broken, now you want to change the dervish.

For a second, stop thinking in strictly logical terms, and understand that many equations can be fairly well approximated by linear equations, within the range of values possible in the game.
Besides, with statistics you can also measure interactions, and set up warning bells to go off if some interaction gets out of hand.
I have been very consistent in saying they both need to change. I don't see why you are confused.

Yes, and linear equations are sometimes used, but the utility is very limited. Even more so if – I mean, I haven’t seen the balance metrics, if they exist, that are used for GW2, but I do know that the effect of things like clones would have to be very roughly approximated.
You’re basically trying to stack a boulder on top of a grain of sand, and keep the whole thing balanced by applying wind pressure to it.

If you don’t see why I am confused, you should explain what you are willing to do with the fact that under your changes, the scythe would be of very limited value to the three other professions that might be interested in using it.
Don’t worry if you can’t, since it’s about the problem that made ANet want to throw away dual professions in the first place.

If you don't see why I am confused, you should explain what you are willing to do with the fact that under your changes, the scythe would be of very limited value to the three other professions that might be interested in using it.

Your suggestion was even more drastic than mine.

We agreed that hitting three foes was a big part of the imbalance. You suggested to basically make that something that only dervs can do if they heavily spec into scythe. Maybe other professions could hit two foes with heavy investment into scythe, maybe. That’s what you said.

What I said was to take those three hits, make 2 come from the scythe, and 1 from the dervish. Other professions get 2 hits on scythe plus whatever their primary is, and dervishes get 3 hits with the scythe or 2 hits with any other melee weapon.

Your suggestion was even more drastic than mine.
We agreed that hitting three foes was a big part of the imbalance. You suggested to basically make that something that only dervs can do if they heavily spec into scythe. Maybe other professions could hit two foes with heavy investment into scythe, maybe. That's what you said.
What I said was to take those three hits, make 2 come from the scythe, and 1 from the dervish. Other professions get 2 hits on scythe plus whatever their primary is, and dervishes get 3 hits with the scythe or 2 hits with any other melee weapon.

Wait, what? You are willing to give dervishes double hits with axes, hammers and swords? Not to mention quadruple hits when using a dual dagger attack?

Wait, what? You are willing to give dervishes double hits with axes, hammers and swords? Not to mention quadruple hits when using a dual dagger attack?

When martial professions use other weapons than their own, they get buffs too.

Rangers get discount on using attacks. Warriors do higher damage. Assassins get energy on crits. Dervishes currently get nothing.

Maybe a full extra attack is too much, but really, why shouldn’t dervishes get some bonus for using attacks? Btw, that extra attack can be tweaked for balance, it might hit only once on a dual attack, and it might not trigger skill effects, for example.

When martial professions use other weapons than their own, they get buffs too.
Rangers get discount on using attacks. Warriors do higher damage. Assassins get energy on crits. Dervishes currently get nothing.
Maybe a full extra attack is too much, but really, why shouldn't dervishes get some bonus for using attacks? Btw, that extra attack can be tweaked for balance, it might hit only once on a dual attack, and it might not trigger skill effects, for example.

And, I guess, do not trip zealous, vampiric, sundering etc, and give no adrenaline gain? I sure hope, especially that last part.

And, I guess, do not trip zealous, vampiric, sundering etc, and give no adrenaline gain? I sure hope, especially that last part.

Well, any good balance strategy includes iteration. Try to figure out what will fix it as best you can, implement it, see what else is broken you missed, and go fix that. I’m not sure which of those additional steps are needed to balance well, but I think the main point as regards GW2 lacking dual-profession is that balancing is possible if you’re willing to put in the effort and do it right.

But in GW2 they didn’t remove dual professions, rather, they reworked it so that the secondary profession became part of the primary profession. Now a warrior doesn’t have to be W/R to use a bow. A ranger doesn’t have to R/W to use a melee weapon. An elementalist doesn’t have to E/N to have some summons. A warrior doesn’t have to W/P to have good support shouts. By making each of those previously secondary-profession roles a full part of the profession, they have compartmentalized it, and made it much easier to balance. They’ve also made it easier to make each profession/weapon combo feel unique.

Instead of having unique resources to each profession that become hard to balance across profession combinations, they now have unique resources and gameplay that is easier to balance within each profession. Now a mesmer can use a sword and apply hexes (illusions) as part of the sword combat mechanic. A thief can trade-off shadowstep weapon skills against damage skills. A warrior has adrenaline skills on every weapon.

Well, any good balance strategy includes iteration. Try to figure out what will fix it as best you can, implement it, see what else is broken you missed, and go fix that. I'm not sure which of those additional steps are needed to balance well, but I think the main point as regards GW2 lacking dual-profession is that balancing is possible if you're willing to put in the effort and do it right.
But in GW2 they didn't remove dual professions, rather, they reworked it so that the secondary profession became part of the primary profession. Now a warrior doesn't have to be W/R to use a bow. A ranger doesn't have to R/W to use a melee weapon. An elementalist doesn't have to E/N to have some summons. A warrior doesn't have to W/P to have good support shouts. By making each of those previously secondary-profession roles a full part of the profession, they have compartmentalized it, and made it much easier to balance. They've also made it easier to make each profession/weapon combo feel unique.
Instead of having unique resources to each profession that become hard to balance across profession combinations, they now have unique resources and gameplay that is easier to balance within each profession. Now a mesmer can use a sword and apply hexes (illusions) as part of the sword combat mechanic. A thief can trade-off shadowstep weapon skills against damage skills. A warrior has adrenaline skills on every weapon.

They totally failed, then, because it doesn’t feel unique at all to me, to the point where I don’t even need to remember what I am playing. Usually, skill 1 is spammed (automatically), skills 2-3, and maybe 4, are used on recharge, skill 5 is used almost on recharge, but usually with a retarget. Small changes as/if necessary (usually not). Use the healing skill on recharge, since it’s too small to get you out of problems, but big enough to keep you floating if you spam it. Throw buffs around. Use your elite as much as you can because there’s almost never reason not to.
Where is my elementalist support shouter by the way? And sure, a ranger doesn’t have to be R/W, but what does that even mean in a game without dual professions? Hey Alaris, you don’t need to be a Zarsquag, whatever that is, to drive a car!

Your last paragraph makes no sense. There were no profession-unique resources, except necro minions.

If you accept necro minions, then you must also accept engineer turrets and mesmer illusions for the same reasons. And by extrapolation, the ranger pets as well. And since when is initiative and adrenaline not profession-unique resources?

I’ll agree that you don’t need to play optimally in GW2 to succeed. That was a complaint you had with GW1 afaik too. But the problem of low difficulty shouldn’t be confused with low execution skill. I think people who beat Liandri or high levels of Fractals would disagree with your assessment that every class plays the same and spamming on recharge is a valid playstyle. Just like you can’t play GW1 GvG like you do normal mode PvE, you can’t succeed in difficult content in GW2 without paying attention to what you are doing.

If you accept necro minions, then you must also accept engineer turrets and mesmer illusions for the same reasons. And by extrapolation, the ranger pets as well. And since when is initiative and adrenaline not profession-unique resources?
I'll agree that you don't need to play optimally in GW2 to succeed. That was a complaint you had with GW1 afaik too. But the problem of low difficulty shouldn't be confused with low execution skill. I think people who beat Liandri or high levels of Fractals would disagree with your assessment that every class plays the same and spamming on recharge is a valid playstyle. Just like you can't play GW1 GvG like you do normal mode PvE, you can't succeed in difficult content in GW2 without paying attention to what you are doing.

Your statement was “Instead of having unique resources to each profession that become hard to balance across profession combinations” obviously about a system resembling GW1 since you mentioned profession combinations. There were no engineer turrets and mesmer illusions in GW1, and if they were, they would not be resources – the only reason necro minions were resources were because they could be spent to gain health or energy (thus, ritualist spirits were also resources in the rare cases where you brought the right skills for it).

Now then you also claimed that they compartmentalized resources and that they therefore can balance the game easier, which is directly opposite of what I explained to you. Read the explanation. Then resume posting.

I have reached level 68 on fractals and I was just spamming ****. Reminded me of the UB days. Not that that has anything to do with difficulty: highly variable gameplay can be easy, and spammy stuff can be hard. Difficulty doesn’t matter: the fact that all classes play essentially the same does. The main difference is whether you are ranged or melee. In a way, I suppose that’s the point, making the irreversible choices (race and profession) mean as little as possible.

GW1 had different resources, big deal. GW2 has tons of resources too, which is my point. You have yet to show how turrets or clones are not resources in GW2.

I disagree that compartmentalization makes it harder to balance. It’s standard practice in complex system design to compartmentalize because it makes the system easier to understand and manage. If you plan to convince me that this would be different for video games than for all of science, good luck.

And finally, I call BS that you can do high levels of fractals by spamming. I don’t think you realize all the micro decisions you make while playing, that have become so tuned that they are automatic. It’s like driving a car. However easy it might seem to the veterans, it’s quite difficult to pull off well on the first try. For example, I tend to slightly delay skills 2-4 on my GS guardian if I see 5 is about to be available and foes are dispersed… then I use 5 to clump them, and 2-4 to AoE dps them. Except I use #3 mainly if I need some defence, I delay it a bit if I am not taking damage or I am about to finish a foe and next one is far. And scepter, I try to hit #3 before #2 to make sure they can’t walk out of the AoE. What feels like spamming to you might actually be highly practiced micro-decisions.

They totally failed, then, because it doesn't feel unique at all to me, to the point where I don't even need to remember what I am playing. Usually, skill 1 is spammed (automatically), skills 2-3, and maybe 4, are used on recharge, skill 5 is used almost on recharge, but usually with a retarget. Small changes as/if necessary (usually not). Use the healing skill on recharge, since it's too small to get you out of problems, but big enough to keep you floating if you spam it. Throw buffs around. Use your elite as much as you can because there's almost never reason not to.

Not sure I want anything to do with this alaris-jam thing, but you’ve never done much PvP in GW2 have you? You can’t spam skills and expect to beat anyone of a decent rank (or ability level in some cases.) If you’re doing hearts in Queensdale, ya, just run your fingers up and down 1-8.

GW1 had different resources, big deal. GW2 has tons of resources too, which is my point. You have yet to show how turrets or clones are not resources in GW2.
I disagree that compartmentalization makes it harder to balance. It's standard practice in complex system design to compartmentalize because it makes the system easier to understand and manage. If you plan to convince me that this would be different for video games than for all of science, good luck.
And finally, I call BS that you can do high levels of fractals by spamming. I don't think you realize all the micro decisions you make while playing, that have become so tuned that they are automatic. It's like driving a car. However easy it might seem to the veterans, it's quite difficult to pull off well on the first try. For example, I tend to slightly delay skills 2-4 on my GS guardian if I see 5 is about to be available and foes are dispersed... then I use 5 to clump them, and 2-4 to AoE dps them. Except I use #3 mainly if I need some defence, I delay it a bit if I am not taking damage or I am about to finish a foe and next one is far. And scepter, I try to hit #3 before #2 to make sure they can't walk out of the AoE. What feels like spamming to you might actually be highly practiced micro-decisions.

Can you pick apart a turret to regain health, or similar? Honest question, I haven't paid much attention to engineer skills. But if you can't, then turrets are an effect, not a resource. You can't call something a resource if you can't spend it.
I have already explained it. They have not actually isolated it. Read the explanation. Then resume posting.
Perhaps you do not notice, but the actions you describe that you are doing with your guardian are basically spamming. Let me put it this way: if all recharges were cut down to one second, would you play in the same way?

Not sure I want anything to do with this alaris-jam thing, but you've never done much PvP in GW2 have you? You can't spam skills and expect to beat anyone of a decent rank (or ability level in some cases.) If you're doing hearts in Queensdale, ya, just run your fingers up and down 1-8.

Isn’t the end game what’s important? Doing hearts, even in Timberline Falls or whatever, is not ever going to be difficult and you could get by without knowing what your skills do (although why you would not want to optimize yourself to some degree I don’t know.) You can’t get by not knowing what your skills do in PvP, high-level Fractals or non-zerg WvW.

You can detonate turrets to cause a blast combo and AoE damage much like clone shatters. Also, if you don't put up the turret, you get to use a toolbelt skill instead. And they can be overcharged to produce an effect much like minions can.
If all recharges were cut to 1s, I would not be playing this game. Too fast recharges is one reason I never bought Fury. So yes, you might say it would change my play, by a lot!

You can't get by not knowing what your skills do in PvP, high-level Fractals or non-zerg WvW.

Isn't the end game what's important? Doing hearts, even in Timberline Falls or whatever, is not ever going to be difficult and you could get by without knowing what your skills do (although why you would not want to optimize yourself to some degree I don't know.) You can't get by not knowing what your skills do in PvP, high-level Fractals or non-zerg WvW.

But knowing what your skills do does not mean that you won't be spamming those skills. As I said, not in PvP, but really the game doesn't change very much no matter which level of Fractals you are at. You have to watch out more, but that surely does not prevent you from spamming. There is almost never a case during combat when output is not a good idea.

You can detonate turrets to cause a blast combo and AoE damage much like clone shatters. Also, if you don't put up the turret, you get to use a toolbelt skill instead. And they can be overcharged to produce an effect much like minions can.
If all recharges were cut to 1s, I would not be playing this game. Too fast recharges is one reason I never bought Fury. So yes, you might say it would change my play, by a lot!

Those are still effects, not resources. GW1 minions - not GW2 ones - were resources because they could be spent for energy (or health).
Fury was horrible, but not for the short recharges! It was because it lacked autoattack. But yeah, cutting to 1 second might be exaggerating, but what I'm saying is, for there not to be spam there must be situations where it would be better to not use a skill. In GW2, skills spend the majority of time on recharge. Something is wrong with that.

But knowing what your skills do does not mean that you won't be spamming those skills. As I said, not in PvP, but really the game doesn't change very much no matter which level of Fractals you are at. You have to watch out more, but that surely does not prevent you from spamming. There is almost never a case during combat when output is not a good idea.

Of course you want to be doing damage. However you need to attack efficiently and move in a safe manner. You can’t just roll your hands across the number keys in fractals, you’d die in seconds or cause a party wipe. For example if your party herds up all the ice elementals on Snowblind and then you scatter all of them with an engi mine, your party is likely going to wipe because you are just randomly pressing keys. If I use snare at the wrong time on a grawl shaman in Volcanic, I will trigger his speed boon before others are ready and he’ll could kill a hostage. If I attack the Ascalonian veterans on sight in the Urban fractal, we could get several warriors 1-hit charging us before we’re in position to deal with that. Charging the dredge powersuit out of position will basically prevent your team from winning (for a few seconds until you die.) Not blocking or reflecting harpy attacks will drag the Uncategorized fractal on for an hour. Using AoE at the wrong time in the Cliffside fractal could make it almost impossible to finish.

Many people (like me) not only swap weapons, but even change entire weapon sets, change utility skills, and change traits midway through fractals.

So what the heck are you trying to say? :shocked: Have you ever played end-game GW2? And that’s a serious question, not an insult. But it sounds like you’re just making things up in order to argue with alaris if you think you can spam your way to victory. And you’ve already acknowledge you can’t spam your way to a win in WvW or PvP, so what is left? Queensdale hearts?

Whatever. Choose what you want to call them, not like you have a history of changing your mind due to debate.

Fury was horrible, but not for the short recharges! It was because it lacked autoattack. But yeah, cutting to 1 second might be exaggerating, but what I'm saying is, for there not to be spam there must be situations where it would be better to not use a skill. In GW2, skills spend the majority of time on recharge. Something is wrong with that.

Ignore my answer to your own question, fine. Like it matters.
Yes, there are many cases in GW2 where I consider not using a skill (for some time at least) is a better move. Ranger shortbow is a great example. But I gave some examples on guardian.
But predictably, you're ignoring any argument that goes against your preconceived notions.
Whatever.

Many people (like me) not only swap weapons, but even change entire weapon sets, change utility skills, and change traits midway through fractals.

OMG what a great answer with all the Fractals examples.
And yes, in dungeons I regularly swap weapons too. And skills too. Maybe not because it's necessary, but it certainly makes things easier.

Of course you want to be doing damage. However you need to attack efficiently and move in a safe manner. You can't just roll your hands across the number keys in fractals, you'd die in seconds or cause a party wipe. For example if your party herds up all the ice elementals on Snowblind and then you scatter all of them with an engi mine, your party is likely going to wipe because you are just randomly pressing keys. If I use snare at the wrong time on a grawl shaman in Volcanic, I will trigger his speed boon before others are ready and he could kill a hostage. If I attack the Ascalonian veterans on sight in the Urban fractal, we could get several warriors 1-hit charging us before we're in position to deal with that. Charging the dredge powersuit out of position will basically prevent your team from winning (for a few seconds until you die.) Not blocking or reflecting harpy attacks will drag the Uncategorized fractal on for an hour. Using AoE at the wrong time in the Cliffside fractal could make it almost impossible to finish.
Many people (like me) not only swap weapons, but even change entire weapon sets, change utility skills, and change traits midway through fractals.
So what the heck are you trying to say? :shocked: Have you ever played end-game GW2? And that's a serious question, not an insult. But it sounds like you're just making things up in order to argue with alaris if you think you can spam your way to victory. And you've already acknowledge you can't spam your way to a win in WvW or PvP, so what is left? Queensdale hearts?

But I can and I do spam in Fractals... Yes, the examples you mention are all true, and require small adjustments to the spamming, but they are handled the same at level 10 as at level 60.
Yes weapon swaps happen, skill swaps happen. So? As I told Alaris, spamming doesn't mean that it's not difficult. It just means that you use skills more or less on recharge.
Yes I have played GW2 "endgame" (if it can be called that), I have played PvP (which is very different) and WvW (though I must say that WvW usually descended into zerging and spamming as well).

Ignore my answer to your own question, fine. Like it matters.
Yes, there are many cases in GW2 where I consider not using a skill (for some time at least) is a better move. Ranger shortbow is a great example. But I gave some examples on guardian.
But predictably, you're ignoring any argument that goes against your preconceived notions.
Whatever.

But you answered my question, and I kept arguing along the intended line. You are the one that claims that intentions always yield correct results, or something like that. Anyway, your argument is that you are making "micro-decisions". But of the GS skills, you are likely to have most of them recharging more than 50% of the time in combat. What decision is there to make if you are prevented from doing so most of the time? You say that one such decision is to delay using skills while you are waiting for BB. Well duh. But that's half a minute, and meanwhile you'll be using at least WW and Leap on recharge, because if you are not you are totally wasting those skills.
Compare that to GW1 Frenzy or Power Block.

If you make decisions every 30 sec that influence what happens in the next 30 seconds, or every minute that influence the next minute… you’re still making decisions.

And no, I don’t use skills on recharge. Most skills I try to use often, but I wait a bit to use them if they can be used at a better time. The only real exception I can think of is grenades, those I totally spam on recharge. Most other weapons, I’ll delay skills somewhat if I think I can make better use of them that way.

And in a zerg, I do play according to what is going on around me, and who’s helping out. Even if we don’t coordinate, we end up making decisions that depend on others. I’ll target the same foes to bring them down sooner, I’ll finish the ones that nobody is finishing (you can do that in this living story), I’ll clump foes if they need to be or AoE a clump if there’s already one nearby (therefore saving my clumping power for a bit).

I don’t have to in order to succeed. But I do know I kill things faster if I play like this.

What level fractals do you play, Jam? You can definitely spam skills on lower levels. If you’re spamming skills at level 60 (which is currently blocked by the way), you’re leeching off your team. There is NO WAY you can stay alive without making intelligent decisions on skill use (or by leeching.)

If you make decisions every 30 sec that influence what happens in the next 30 seconds, or every minute that influence the next minute... you're still making decisions.
And no, I don't use skills on recharge. Most skills I try to use often, but I wait a bit to use them if they can be used at a better time. The only real exception I can think of is grenades, those I totally spam on recharge. Most other weapons, I'll delay skills somewhat if I think I can make better use of them that way.
And in a zerg, I do play according to what is going on around me, and who's helping out. Even if we don't coordinate, we end up making decisions that depend on others. I'll target the same foes to bring them down sooner, I'll finish the ones that nobody is finishing (you can do that in this living story), I'll clump foes if they need to be or AoE a clump if there's already one nearby (therefore saving my clumping power for a bit).
I don't have to in order to succeed. But I do know I kill things faster if I play like this.

But you were discussing GS guardian. WW is, on spam, available twice while BB is unavailable, and Leap is available once. If you are not using those, even on single enemies that you are already in melee with, you are literally wasting damage potential. Why would you

not

use them? Worse, if you don't use Leap exactly on recharge, you will have to wait if you want to use it together with BB 15 seconds later.
Yes, if you are in a zerg you will follow the flock. That's how zergs work, duh.

What level fractals do you play, Jam? You can definitely spam skills on lower levels. If you're spamming skills at level 60 (which is currently blocked by the way), you're leeching off your team. There is NO WAY you can stay alive without making intelligent decisions on skill use (or by leeching.)

I currently don't play Fractals at all. I did when it was new and in fact if you played a lot back then you probably played with me. I was one of the first to reach 40 and one of the first to reach 60 (for both those, not as in a member of the first group lol, but as in maybe the 50 first people). Why did they block it, by the way? In fact I haven't played GW2 for weeks now except to check the new patch.
It's true that intelligent decisions on skill usage are needed. It's also true that the intelligent decision is almost always to use a skill, almost never to not use it. As I said, compare to GW1's Frenzy.

But you were discussing GS guardian. WW is, on spam, available twice while BB is unavailable, and Leap is available once. If you are not using those, even on single enemies that you are already in melee with, you are literally wasting damage potential. Why would you

not use them? Worse, if you don’t use Leap exactly on recharge, you will have to wait if you want to use it together with BB 15 seconds later.

I don’t always use Leap together with BB. Why would I? I’m standing in the calm, BB is recharged, I use it, pull everybody towards me, put down the symbol of wrath, then a ww and finally maybe a leap to finish that straggler. Often not required…

I don't always use Leap together with BB. Why would I? I'm standing in the calm, BB is recharged, I use it, pull everybody towards me, put down the symbol of wrath, then a ww and finally maybe a leap to finish that straggler. Often not required...

It’s blind and extra damage. Sometimes you use it instead of pull if someone else is already AoEing the clump, sometimes you use it to get to a straggler. You still use it. And why wouldn’t you?

Because I’d prefer to have it active instead of using it on a foe I can easily kill with my standard 1 attack. While learning the profession, too often I had it recharging when I needed it simply because I used it on recharge even though it wasn’t required.

Yes, if you are in a zerg you will follow the flock. That's how zergs work, duh.

It's blind and extra damage. Sometimes you use it instead of pull if someone else is already AoEing the clump, sometimes you use it to get to a straggler. You still use it. And why wouldn't you?

If you choose who to use it on, then sometimes you see a straggler but you're still AoE'ing a bit, so you choose to keep your blind (delay its use) and you have made a choice.
Think of that blind attack (and mesmer sword #2) as short-duration reverse-frenzy. You do extra damage, but you take extra damage too if you use it at the wrong time. And guardian mace #3, you block and if you happen to block something you do damage, or you do damage.
If you're spamming on refresh, then you're accumulating easily the equivalent in damage of a frenzy badly used.

Because I'd prefer to have it active instead of using it on a foe I can easily kill with my standard 1 attack. While learning the profession, too often I had it recharging when I needed it simply because I used it on recharge even though it wasn't required.

But why? The result was that you now killed that enemy slightly slower. You were moved one second away from getting the loot and being able to log off.

Duh, except if you played the living story this past days, that is exactly what NOT to do. You need to break from the zerg and split into smaller teams so you can cover more events at the same time. Duh.
Also, if you don't understand the utility of making a big foe with frontal AoE damage face away from allies, then you need to go read about tanking in WoW. Yes, I said that. There's a lot more you can do to help your zerg than just follow them.
If you choose who to use it on, then sometimes you see a straggler but you're still AoE'ing a bit, so you choose to keep your blind (delay its use) and you have made a choice.
Think of that blind attack (and mesmer sword #2) as short-duration reverse-frenzy. You do extra damage, but you take extra damage too if you use it at the wrong time. And guardian mace #3, you block and if you happen to block something you do damage, or you do damage.
If you're spamming on refresh, then you're accumulating easily the equivalent in damage of a frenzy badly used.

When you are in a zerg, it doesn't matter what your foe has. They literally die in 5 seconds anyway. But sure, for some enemies, in some situations, you might need to stand in a different place. And spam your skills.
I really don't think that misusing skills, especially in a zerg, is comparable to misusing Frenzy. In the former case, you (maybe) die and some guy in the zerg will revive you and you will all keep rolling over enemies. In the latter case, you die, the party wipe, and you lost 30 minutes of delving through UW.

I really don't think that misusing skills, especially in a zerg, is comparable to misusing Frenzy. In the former case, you (maybe) die and some guy in the zerg will revive you and you will all keep rolling over enemies. In the latter case, you die, the party wipe, and you lost 30 minutes of delving through UW.

So your problem is that GW2 isn’t difficult enough. Not that its skills are uninteresting spam skills.

Your answer was that you can get away with spam because the game doesn't kick you out. Difficulty IS the current topic of discussion.
I said QED.

But that skills are spammed or not does not make the game easier or more difficult. As an example that you yourself mentioned, Fury could be insanely difficult at times, and not just because of the human opponents – and still all you did was to spam. Spamming, however, makes it more boring, and reduces the amount of difference in gameplay between professions.

I'll agree that you don't need to play optimally in GW2 to succeed. That was a complaint you had with GW1 afaik too.

But the problem of low difficulty shouldn't be confused with low execution skill.

Why are you saying QED when you haven't actually demonstrated anything of importance to the discussion, nor did you declare it beforehand (which is the point of a QED, which means "which was to be demonstrated" and thus means that you have a declared goal to demonstrate... wait, are you actually using words without knowing what they mean? Again??).

I did declare it beforehand. See above.
Therefore, QED.

But that skills are spammed or not does not make the game easier or more difficult.

Yes, it almost always does. In fact, it'd be hard to find real game examples where it's not the case. The questions are (1) how much do you gain by skillful use vs spamming, and (2) does it affect success rate or completion speed.
In GW2, using skills right lets you kill foes quite a bit faster... but it's hard to see its effect on success rate much because success rate is already very high.